European History is Not White History – A response to Mark Collett

European History is Not White History – A response to Mark Collett

Hello everyone, this is a video about European history, and also about one or two tactics that fascists use in order to misrepresent it. Uh, for examples of such misrepresentation, we’ll be looking at a video by Mark Collett, entitled “Writing Europeans Out of Their Own History.” Currently with over 400,000 views. Now unfortunately, I have to make a brief diversion here at the start of the video in order to prove to you that this video was actually made by a fascist. You know, I kinda need you on board with that idea if we’re gonna be talking about fascist tactics, don’t I. So okay, who is Mark Collett? He’s the former leader of the youth division of the far-right BNP, the British National Party. Now, the BNP has roots in far more open and undisguised fascism. But after Nick Griffin became leader of the party in 1999, they began using more moderate and ambiguous language, disguising their real aims and beliefs behind euphemisms. Uh, helpfully for us, Griffin gave a speech to a group called the American Friends of the BNP in the year 2000, alongside former Grand Wizard of the KKK, David Duke, by the way, in which he lays out the thinking behind this change in tactics. Let’s have a listen. [GRIFFIN] There’s a difference between selling out your ideas and selling your ideas. And the British National Party isn’t about selling out its ideas, which are your ideas too, but we are determined now to sell them, and that means, basically, to use the saleable words, as I say, freedom, security, identity, democracy. Nobody can criticize them. Nobody can come at you or attack you on those ideas. They are saleable. Perhaps one day, once by being rather more subtle, we got ourselves in a position where we
control the British Broadcasting media, then perhaps one day the British people might change their mind and say “Yes, every last one must go.” Perhaps they will, one day. But if you hold that out as your
sole aim to start with, you’re gonna get absolutely nowhere. So, instead of talking about racial purity, talk about identity. [SHAUN] So, that’s fairly unambiguous there, isn’t it. We want to talk about racial purity, but we know it isn’t a goer, so we talk about identity and freedom and democracy and so on. It’s a fairly common tactic of various far-right groups. Now, 2 years after this speech, Mark Collett was featured in a channel 4 documentary called “Young, Nazi and Proud,” during which he was secretly filmed expressing admiration for Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. The documentary also includes footage of him being told he was secretly recorded, which is hilarious and I would highly encourage you to give it a watch. Also at one point, Collett claims he isn’t a Nazi because there’s no Nazi symbols around his house, you know, as if it was owning a swastika flag that made one a Nazi instead of sharing political beliefs with the Nazis. Either way, here’s a picture of Mark Collett with his girlfriend, who has a swastika tattooed on her chest. So, then, Mark Collett is a fascist. And… my apologies, I realize it’s rather inelegant of me to just dump all of that on you at the start there. I usually try to be a bit more subtle about it, you know, but I feel it is important that as we go through the arguments in the video, we realize that what we’re seeing is fascism trying to be “saleable,” as Nick Griffin put it. I would still encourage you to watch his video first so you can be sure I’m not misrepresenting his arguments. Although it is fairly quick to summarize, so I will do so here. So, Mark’s argument goes like this: There exists a nefarious plot to write Europeans out of their own history, a nefarious plot that has found itself and acted in the following ways: casting a mixed-race woman to play Joan of Arc at a festival, a BBC cartoon about life in Roman Britain that showed a black Roman soldier, uh, the “Hollow Crown,” a series of TV adaptations of Shakespeare plays, cast a black actor to play Queen Margaret, Dr. Who cast a black actor to portray a Victorian soldier, and elsewhere shows black Victorians on the streets of London, ABC cast a black actor to play Sir Lancelot in their show “Once Upon a Time,” and various other places cast black actors to play things you get the point. Now, Mark compares this to both whitewashing and cultural appropriation. Pointing out the supposed contradiction that some people about white actors taking roles for minority actors but they don’t complain about the reverse. Mark then concludes that all this is a deliberate cultural Marxist plot to undermine Western civilization by eroding our common bonds, histories, homogeneity, and so on. Writing people out of their own history will atomize that people and weaken their in-group preference, so he says. And we need to come together and defend Europe by becoming fascists. Well, he doesn’t actually say that last part, but you know, you may as well. So what do we think about this video? Well, it is riddled with historical inaccuracies for a start. Before we get to the arguments here, I’m gonna have to get my red pen out, do a little correcting. Let’s start with that BBC cartoon showing a black Roman soldier. So this was a video put out on the BBC Teach channel that currently has about 50,000 views, about 6,000 of which appear to have only turned up to give a downvote, though. Uh, so then, black Roman soldiers in Britain — were they a thing? Well, we’ll find out shortly. First of all, as Mark Collett shows this image in his video, he says this sentence: “at every turn, the BBC attempted to shoehorn someone who was not indigenous to the British Isles into the production.” Now, Mark, I’m sorry to have to tell you this, but this cartoon was about life after the Roman invasion of Britain. The Romans weren’t indigenous. They invaded, and took it over. You know, you should probably actually watch the cartoons and… Maybe learn something, you know. Uh, why do you think Britain is called Britain, even? That’s just some homework for you there. Anyway, yes, the Roman Empire spanned from the UK to Africa to the Middle East, and it recruited people into the legions from all over the place. And the Romans would use legions from one part of the empire to guard other parts of the empire — it’s a lot easier to say things like “go and put down that rebellion” if you’re not ordering men to go and fight their brothers and fathers and cousins and so on. I’m gonna read a little here from the “Historia Augusta” speaking about the life of Emperor Septimius Severus. And I quote: [READING] Uh, Luguvallum there being the name of a fort along Hadrian’s Wall. So there we go, “Historia Augusta,” black soldier, manning Hadrian’s Wall. Yeah. And, the emperor in that story, Septimius Severus, was himself, from North Africa, born in what is modern-day Libya, his wife was Syrian. And this is a surviving image of the imperial family from the time. The real historical revisionism here is pretending that the Roman empire was exclusively white. And also somehow homogeneous with other apparently exclusively white societies that it was in the process of invading and conquering. I mean, that doesn’t make any sense. So, were there any black Romans? Yes there were. Uh, next up, let’s talk about that Dr. Who episode that showed a black Victorian soldier. Now, it’s quite interesting, this. As we can see from doing a little research about it, uh, Mark Gatiss, one of the writers of Dr. Who, initially protested against the casting. And quoting from the Telegraph here, it was only after he discovered record showing that there was in fact a single black soldier in Victoria’s army that he accepted the decision. Gatiss told how he decided to research the issue and came across the story of Jimmy Durham, a Sudanese boy who was rescued from the River Nile in 1886 and brought up by soldiers of the Durham Light Infantry Regiment. However, whether or not there is actual historical precedent, for portraying a black Victorian soldier isn’t really the most pressing issue here if we’re aiming for historical accuracy. Because the episode of Dr. Who that features the character of the black Victorian soldier has him fighting a war against a race of reptilian men called the “Ice Warriors”… On Mars. [SARCASTICALLY] So much for historical accuracy, eh? We all remember, don’t we, when Queen Victoria sent a detachment of troops. To Mars. To fight the Ice Warriors. What a betrayal of their memory to pretend it wasn’t exclusively white men who lost their lives in the Martian ice men wars. [MOCKINGLY] “Writing Europeans out of their own history.” Honestly… Now a similar point that can be made for that depiction of a black Lancelot in the show “Once Upon a Time,” which appears to be some sort of Shrek-esque, “what if all the fairy tales, but at once” type story. For example, the show also includes Anna and Elsa from “Frozen”, Ariel from “The Little Mermaid”, Cruella de Vil… That’s such a good name. Cruella de Vil… It’s amazing. So this is hardly a historical documentary, is it? You know, and Lancelot wasn’t real. Remember, he’s a fictional character. Regardless, is there precedent for a black Arthurian knight? Uh, yes, as it turns out. Morien is the Moorish son of Sir Aglovale, one of the knights of the Round Table. And the 13th century story he appears in describes him as: “black of face and limb” and also says that “his teeth were white as chalk, otherwise he was altogether black, he bared his head, which was black as pitch. That was the fashion of his land, Moors are black as burnt brands; he was all black, even as I tell ye. His head, his body, and his hands were all black, saving only his teeth.” And so on. So you get it? This guy was black. So it turns out even the Round Table wasn’t exclusively white. And there was also Palamedes, who was a Saracen who converted to Christianity and if we’re talking historical accuracy, there was also the Green Knight whose skin and hair and horse, even, for some reason, was green. And who, by the way, survives having his own head cut off. So… You know. Uh, returning to Dr. Who for a moment, and that scene featuring the black Victorians on the street. So, is this a malicious plot to undermine Western civilization? Or whatever. Well, let me reveal one of my tricks of the trade to you right here. What I do when I want to find out about stuff, for example if there’s any pictures of black Victorians, is head over to Google and type in “black Victorians” and do an image search. And lo and behold, there are. Now, I’m saying Victorians here, but that’s not really accurate to the Dr. Who clip which is set in Regency England. You see, Mark Collett says the Doctor is walking through, quote: “Regency England in Victorian times” which doesn’t really make sense. The episode’s set in 1814, and Victoria wasn’t even born for another 5 years. But, whatever. Minor mistake. The important thing here is the year, 1814. So, then, who are these 3? Well, they are some prominent black abolitionists in England who were active prior to the date that that Dr. Who episode is set. I’ll put some links below in the description so you can have a read about that. I mentioned those black abolitionists here because England participated in — not sure if you’ve ever heard of it — the slave trade. One consequence of which was that many black people were moved around all over the place without a choice. And after the buying and selling of slaves was abolished across the British Empire, those black people didn’t disappear. Anyway, next up, let’s talk about Sophie Okonedo playing Queen Margaret in that television adaptation of Shakespeare. Now, the important point here is that she is not playing Margaret the historical figure. She is playing Margaret, the Shakespeare character. This is a theatrical practice that’s been translated to television along with the rest of the material. Speaking to the Express, director Dominic Cooke said: [READING] Now, something I could point out here is, for instance, Laurence Olivier playing a fellow in blackface. And I could note that I don’t see Mark Collett complaining about that. But that would be rather lazy of me. You see, what I’d be doing there would be making the same point as Mark Collett makes with his whitewashing contradiction, just in the other direction. You see, Mark makes mention of both whitewashing and cultural appropriation debates to highlight how the supposed cultural Marxists always complain when a white person appropriates something or takes an acting role from a minority actor, but they don’t complain about the reverse. Now, what Mark doesn’t mention here is that he also participates in this apparent hypocrisy. Because he is complaining about black actors being cast in things while at the same time, not condemning whitewashing or cultural appropriation, which he should, by all accounts, be equally outraged about, if he were coming at this from a position of neutrality, anyway. But just pointing that out wouldn’t be good enough, I don’t think, for me. That would just be me saying, “Hey Mark, that thing you’re complaining about, well, you do it too.” Nehh. You know, what I really need to do is explain why minority actors being cast in quote, “white roles” isn’t as bad as the reverse. And it’s for a couple of reasons. Uh, the first being a rather simple one. There are typically more roles to go around for white actors. You know, Scarjo playing a Japanese character in a live-action adaptation of a Japanese story is bad partially because there are so few lead roles in Hollywood, for Asian actors. It’s not like there’s equal representation there at all, there. On the other hand, the reverse, an Asian actor being cast in a role you might typically assume would be played by a white actor, that brings us closer to equal representation. So that’s why people, on the left anyway, tend to care more about one instance than the other there. Now, to be fair here, I can see instances where a director would cast someone in a role for a cynical, rather than purely altruistic reason. So why would someone cast a black person, say, as a character who’s more usually portrayed as white? Well, I can see 3 main reasons. The first is a sort of colorblind, “I hired whoever I thought was best for the job” thing, you know, that’s fairly boring. Uh, next up is the socially conscious, altruistic reason. You know, if someone thinks that increased minority representation is a good thing for society, then they cast minority actors in their things, how nice of them. Uh, the third is the cynical, capitalist reason. You know, I- we want to market our film to black people, say, so we cast a famous black person in it to make it easier for us to do that. Or maybe if you’re especially cynical, you could try to use the debate and attention around a controversial casting choice as free marketing. And then cast as to intentionally provoke one. I’m sure there’s a fair amount of that going on behind the scenes in Hollywood. Now we’re getting into the fascist rhetoric section of my video here, but the problem for Mark Collett and other fascists like him, is that they need to elevate everything to the level of a civilization-ending struggle. So much so that they completely missed the simpler and more pedestrian explanations for what they’re seeing. You know, maybe a director hired a Chinese actor to be in a Hollywood movie not because they want to undermine and destroy Western civilization, but because they want to market the movie in China. It’s not as exciting, though, when you put it like that, is it? This escalation rhetoric is a central pillar of fascist argument. Everything is foreshadowing the imminent doom of civilization. So a cartoon for children with a black person in it, well, that’s a sign we’re headed for destruction and death. It’s why you never hear a fascist say oh, well, this is only a minor issue, this. You know. This next point doesn’t matter all that much or whatever, because for them, everything is turned up to 11. At all times. They do this because they’re asking people to accept their extreme worldview and politics, and so they need an extreme threat to justify it and lacking one, they just make one up, out of bits of children’s cartoons and old Dr. Who episodes. And whatever else is lying around. The next trick I want to talk about is rather a big one. It’s the trick of alluding to an apparent, homogeneous, historical, European identity. Let’s look at Mark Collett’s examples of things that he’s complaining about. Joan of Arc was a figure in the Hundred Years War between the English and the French. The BBC cartoons were about the Roman invasion of Britain. He shows the Bayeux Tapestry depicting the start of the Norman conquest of England. He shows a painting of the battle of, uh wherever that was, between the French and the UK and allies. And most confusingly of all, he shows some Vikings from the TV show “Vikings”, I believe, when he’s talking about the lands that our ancestors built. Mark, what are you talking about? European history is a history of conquest, and division, and warfare. When were we ever united or homogeneous or monocultural? I mean, Britain for instance, was invaded by and invaded in turn, everyone, basically. When you say your ancestors, who do you mean, even? Which one of the various groups of people who invaded Britain are you talking about? Of course, the reality here is that when Mark or other fascists like him say “culture” or “identity” or “religion” or “ethnicity” or “nationality” they mean skin color. And it really is that simple. So Britain and France fighting a series of wars over a 100 years that really is monocultural and homogeneous to them, because both territories were primarily white. Which is incredible. White fascists would rather be engaged in a bloody fight to the death against other white people then have to sit next to a black person on the bus. I genuinely believe that to be true. Skin color really is everything here. Take, for instance, this painting. Now, Mark includes this in his video around 12 minutes in as he’s talking about how Europeans had homogeneous communities, common traditions, common bonds, and a shared ancestry. Mark includes this painting in his video because everyone in it is white. Which apparently proves their common bonds, ancestry, traditions, and so on. However, by showing this painting, Mark betrays that he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. This painting is “A Private View at the Royal Academy, 1881” by William Powell Frith. To briefly quote the artist talking about this painting in 1887, [READING QUOTE] That “apostle of the beautiful” there being Oscar Wilde. So then, this painting, which Mark Collett included to show a supposedly homogeneous culture, is actually showcasing cultural divisions. Viewers at the time would’ve been supposed to laugh at Wilde’s groupies hanging on his every word. They would’ve been supposed to notice the contrast between the more traditional dress of the women in the center of the painting and the aesthetic-inspired dress of the other women. They would’ve noticed the group of men looking disapprovingly at Wilde and so on. And Wilde was of course, Irish. [SARCASTICALLY] And the Irish, as we all know, have always been treated as equals by the English, right? I’d like to see Mark Collett explain to a group of Irish people about how they and the English have always shared a common culture. I’m sure that would go over well. My point here is that this painting, far from portraying a unified culture, actually shows a divided one. Divided in terms of nationality, politics, art, fashion, and so on. And behind the scenes, sexuality. You know, Wilde had sex with men and was imprisoned for it. I’d also like to note that we can see in this painting a portrait of the then recently deceased Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, who was Jewish by birth. Given that fact, and that the other most prominent figure here is a flamboyant homosexual immigrant, I wouldn’t have thought Mark Collett would’ve been a fan of this painting, all around. Anyway, to wrap up here, by reducing the various peoples in Europe to nothing but their skin colors, and by coaching their followers to identify with being white and nothing else, Mark Collett and his fascist pals are the ones writing people out of their own histories. The actual historical truth is that yes, what we today call Europe has *always* been comprised of different peoples and ethnicities and cultures. All, by the way, with different ideas of what race is. European history is not white history. Nothing is that clear-cut and simple. And I’ll end with a question to Mark Collett or any of his fans that may be watching. Is Spain European? Do the country of Spain and its inhabitants count as European? And does its history count as European history? To you… I’m asking, obviously, I mean… I know it’s in Europe. I ask because for more than 7 centuries, what we today call Spain was largely an Islamic territory, conquered by the Arabs and Berbers in the Umayyad conquest of Hispania in the 700s. Now, 7 centuries is a long time. That is centuries of Islamic history taking place in Europe right there! What do you… think about that? Rhetorical question, of course, I already know what they think about that. They think it doesn’t count because they weren’t white. Because when fascists lying about history say Europe, again, what they really mean… … is white people. Thanks a lot for watching, everyone. I hope you enjoyed this video. One thing I could’ve talked about here that I didn’t were the various remains found in Europe of people who were born elsewhere that predate even the Romans, you know. It turns out that basically anywhere that’s traded with anywhere else in history has seen at least some degree of people moving around. But I’ll probably save all that for a different video if I cover it. I’m sure we’ll get around to it eventually. Thanks as always to all my patrons here who enable me to keep making videos like this. Aren’t they all lovely. Look at them there. So thanks for watching and subscribing and all that jazz. I’ve got a Twitter and a CuriousCat linked in the description if you’d like to follow me on Twitter or ask me a question. Okay, thanks folks! See ya next time.


  1. europe now has a white history, just like most northern european countries are still white.

    no matter how much the colored fellow in Europe wants.

    and Americans have nothing to say about Europe

  2. So how do you explain Japan, which is an ethno-state and a democracy? And what about those ethnically pure African states? Are you going to accuse them of fascism too? You are an imbecile. National purity has nothing whatsoever to do with Fascism. What do you think Stalin was doing ….calling for an Russian ethno-state. Cretinous.

  3. Yes, European history is white history. What you are talking about are exceptions to the rule and those exceptions are being pushed today as if they were the norm, which is why so many of us have a problem with it.

  4. Berbers, Arabs and Turks heavely influenced Southern Europe. From Iberian Peninsula to the Balkans and Caucasus you can see the descendants of their blood. And have been living in Europe for more than a thousand years, but for racist they are not Europeans.

  5. I can't believe that the fact that there were Roman citizens of African descent (or just straight up from Africa) is up for debate. There were LOTS of them. Scipio (He's called Scipio AFRICANUS, by the way) had entire cohorts of locally drafted soldiers from northern Africa. Egyptians and Scythians fought in the Germanic Wars as auxiliaries in the legion. Then do you know what happened? Some of them stayed. They settled. They were awarded tracts of land for their service and they started families. African people were DEFINITELY present wherever the Roman Legion was and some of the people who think that they didn't exist may be descended from them.

  6. Europe was always black, goy. Now import millions of immigrants who despise you, your culture and everything you stand for. After all, there is only one race, the human race.

  7. lol extremely rare mentions of black persons in Europe << WhiTeS areNT the ONly EuroPeaN NaTiVEs>>

  8. Really. How can anyone be expected to take seriously a battle between Vicky soldiers and Ice warriors on Mars. Everyone knows that battle took place on Triton.

  9. Mark collet never said the romans were indigenous to britain his main concern was the fact that in the cartoon of roman Britain they featured black romans, black Celts, black british, blacks in the roman empire were very few in number.

    (there may have been a few middle easterners and north africans in roman britain but that's irrelevant because middle easterners and north africans are not black)

    Your using anecdots shaun, and septimius severus was not black he was half italian half berber lybian.

    Mark makes a very clear distinction between history, mythology and fiction hence why he mentions Lancelot and the doctor who black soldier also another reason he brings up the docter who episode is becuase in the episode they go back in time to Victorian England and there are alot of blacks walking around and basically docter who gets political and just outright says jesus was black and that history is white washed.

    And on another note the muslims invaded medieval spain there a part of Europe's history as invaders.

    To any of shuans fans i strongly encourage you to go watch mark collets original video and you'll see how out of context shuan cherry picked Mark's video.

  10. Mark Collett aside… what a pathetic attempt of 'debunking,' by highlighting historical EXCEPTIONS to the rule, whilst completely ignoring the evident 'anti-white' agenda currently in force! Absolutely pitiful waste of time and space! But seeing as you like to use Google Search as your base for determining 'your facts,' then go back to Google and search for "white couples" and see what image results you get – and then do the same for "black couples" and compare the two. But for God's sake, don't share the results with anyone else, because who knows… you may be accused of being a Fascist!

    P.S. As for Spain… at the start of its quest of attacking and dominating Europe, Islam invaded Spain at the beginning of the 8th century (when Spain was ethnic white European). During this Islamic invasion of white Christian Europe, over a million white slaves were taken into the Islamic world (yes, white slaves existed centuries BEFORE African slaves even began being traded by whites – and for far longer). Between approx 700AD and 1500AD more than 200 battles to save Spain took place. Eventually ethnic Spaniards won and REGAINED their nation from the invaders.

    There clearly is no doubt that a proportionately small number of non-whites existed in Europe for centuries – but that didn't make Europe 'multicultural' especially in today's meaning of the word. Also that is no reason to now try and portray non-whites having played a dominant role and taking credit in the cultural development of Europe, which is the leftists' goal, but comical to say the least! THAT'S THE PROBLEM we now face with regards to subverting European history. And you claim that your opposition – labeling them Fascists, etc. – misrepresents the truth??? That's funny! The continent of Europe was and is ethnic white, just as the continent of Africa was and is ethnic black.

  11. “European History is not White History.” Lol, how mental do you have to be to believe such a thing.
    In that case “African History is not Black History, Persian History is not Iranian History, Middle-Eastern History is not Arab History, Ottoman History is not Turkish History, Indian History is not Indian History, Chinese History is not Chinese History.”

    Stop trying to rewrite white history.

  12. I disagree with historical figures in media being played by people that don't fit their description. I want a white Shaka Zulu as little as I want to see a black Karl V. Though the notion that "blackwashing" european characters is somehow part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the west is really stupid.

  13. Shaun: shows Portugal and Spain under islamic ocupation, mentions only Spain
    cries in portuguese
    Other than that great video tho!

  14. Ok Shaun… so you say that its ok for minorities to take the roles of typically white characters but its bad for the reverse. I can agree but please then explain the MCU and Disney. Why is it that Marvel is making Carol Danvers' Captain Marvel the face of the MCU for the woke points while Monica Rambeau the black, female Captain Marvel, that a lot of people like, is now a child that looks up to Carol Danvers? Why is Thor being made into a woman and most of the Eternals are being race/gender swapped while Scarlet Witch and Black Widow, two female characters that have been in the MCU for a LONG time are being forgotten and Jessica Jones' t.v. show got cancelled but they seem to have no intention of doing anything else with her? Why does Aladdin and Mulan get to have culturally correct characters in their live-action movies but the Little Mermaid, just about one of the most culturally white tales in existence, has Ariel changed to being black when they could have used The Princess and the Frog which is a very interesting story, filled to the brim with black characters?

    And there's my problem, Hollywood doesn't care about representation and minorities, they care about money. And that's why they push all this representation and inclusion to get minorities who don't realize they've been insulted by being handed down typically white characters. Because you know what impression I, a black person, when they change the Falcon into Captain America? I get, 'This black character isn't good when he's his-self but he is good when he acts like this white guy HEE HEE HEE! Buy our merch!' Insulting me straight to my face.

  15. The Romans were white European with a minority from MENA; no blacks. You cannot replace a Roman with a Black person! You dont even know the demographic history. The Romans had very little impact demographic on Brittain, which we see in ancient dna. The locals became "roman". And yes, we all know Saxons, Vikings, and Normans invaded England but they were all white, not Black. We Europeans are highly related. You think a few blacks being in Europe post slave trade is reason to pretend they were ever common? There were a few whites in Asia and Africa long ago. Lets pretend whites were common in Ancient China and Ghana…

  16. North Africans (Moors) and Middle Easterners were not Black (sub Saharan African)!!! You keep pretending that blacks were in ancient Brittain. Also, North African Moors/Saracens were exceptionally rare outside S. Europe so they should almost never be featured in ancient british shows. Africans had no impact on the DNA of the British but whites did impact the Ancient North Africans, Indians, and Northwest Chinese. When will you advocate for whites to replace these actors? How do you gloss over a black lancelot, a black queen, and a black joan of arc?

  17. Shaun doesn't have any groundbreaking/inspiring ideas or arguments. He presents his fallacious claims as if theyre an indisputed truth, in such an obnoxious way as to say "Well thats just nonsense allow me to school you", backing it up with a hollow umbrella term like 'fascist'.

  18. Having a swastika tattooed on your chest doesn't make you a nationalsocialist, that merely makes you a degenerate

  19. Hello (((Shaun))) of course (((they))) are purposely trying to write Europeans out of our own history.

    Just do a (((google))) search on "European history" images and you will see its entirely black according to (((Google))).

  20. Look at photos of European societies from 100 years ago and you dont see "multiculturalism" you see – well – Europeans.

    Explain that.

  21. Can I say I hate the 'white people' tag? Since when a color was a culture or an ethnicity? I'm saying this because I was watching the other day a video that described my country (Chile) as 50% White, 40% non white and 10% Other minorities. What's that supposed to mean? Are we the same 'white people' as in the states? Obviously not! We have Spanish, turkish, Jewish (arab/north african), german, mapuche and more on our bloods, varying to one person to the other. No one here is pure, but we are, still, 50% white 40% non white. Too simplistic. I hate it.

  22. I don't know if the dude Shaun is responding to is British like he is, but is he aware St. George was Turkish? The patron saint of England was likely Turkish or Greek, assuming he was a real person.

  23. I majored in Classics and European History, so it truly pains me when these fascists spew their white supremacist drivel.

  24. James bond is now going to be black, are you happy enough now? Any other characters you want changing to make yourselfs feel better,, insert suggestions here,,,,,,

  25. "Regency"- titled after the Prince Regent.
    "Victorian"- titled after Queen Victoria.
    "Elizebethan" – (rusittingdown?) titled after Queen Elizebeth I.

  26. Europe is the white continent, the home of the white people of the world – of course European history is white history, and it's not 'Fascist' to say so. Non-white migration into Europe has happened in living memory. The presence of a few black Africans inhabiting the Roman Empire doesn't change that. To the Romans 'Africa' meant the North African coast inhabited by white people prior to the Muslim invasions of the 7thC.

  27. I'm sure Mark Collett and most others who argue that the media is trying to write out white history is well aware there was a small amount black people during these times. It's more about how it doesn't make sense to depict a bunch of black people in a movie about a society that at the time was at least a 95% white society but probably closer to 99%. It's like casting a white person to play a role of a modern day African (unless it was about South Africa). Ok sure there's a small amount of white people in say Nigeria but it makes more sense to depict the vast majority and if their media went ahead and depicted a member of a tiny minority in their country rather then one of the 99% majority wouldn't many of them wonder why?

  28. What a garbage video. Also limey de mierda, Spain's reconquest of the peninsula included killing all the arabs in Sevilla,Granada, etc., ethnic cleansing on a large scale, so don't give me this bullshit about how Spain was arab when only a few thousand soldiers were there and all the locals had nothing to do with them.

  29. another point about different minority roles playing parts that some would say are "white roles" acting is about pretending and being something you're not not about you as a real person being exactly the same as the character you're portraying

  30. I get what you are saying but come on you can't say European history isn't white history it is, yes it saw at some points non Europeans enter and partake in some historical events but overall its European. With that said still original characters who are a certain race should be kept as they are in my opinion, obviously when this is done it doesn't change history, but tokenism is annoying especially when we are craving our own origin characters figures and histories to be shown.

  31. "moors" "aethiopias" Herodotus writes about and all the american indian negroes they put in their art work jewelry merchandise and advertisements.

  32. A great bit of vintage Mark Collett is the RE:Brand episode 'Nazi Boy', which can be found on Youtube. It's a pre-sobriety Russell Brand spending a week with Mark, and whilst Russell Brand doesn't exactly come out covered in glory (He's on heroin and drunk for much of the series), it's pretty much all you need to watch to get the measure of Mark Collett.

  33. What's your point with this video? Mark Collett is wrong about England being ethnically and culturally destroyed? Take a look at London, mate. Brits are a minority in their OWN FUCKING COUNTRY. Idiot, shill.

  34. "The reason a director chose an Asian actor is because they wanted to market the movie in China"

    Yes, likewise, a director might select a white actor to play an Asian role is to market it in America.

  35. its not about that there were never any black people here, its about constantly pushing it on white people who DID MAKE THE HISTORY OF EUROPE! It would be ridiculous to tell otherwise

  36. Every time an American nazi talks about Europe and "European culture" it makes me want to knock their teeth out. Yeah, as if Europe didn't have massive problems with infighting. As if North Europeans didn't have massive disdain for Southern Europeans to the point of actively discriminating against us. As if it wasn't commonplace for the entirety of Europe to hate on the French. As if Europe wasn't a massive mix of nationalities all mostly pitted against each other.
    Like, holy shit, the best representation of actual European politics is Eurovision. You never see the Scandinavian countries voting for anything outside of themselves, and usually countries vote for their neighbors. And yeah, it sounds silly, but there's a reason why this happens. Because not all people in Europe are considered to be the same. Just look at ther Eastern European block and how they're seen by the rest of Europe. Hint: not well, not well at all.
    And even within the same countries, there can be massive divides and huge cultural differences, for example North and South Italy have completely different cultures that sometimes are really incompatible.

    So really, hearing these idiots talk about Europe pisses me off to no end. They really have no idea what Europe actually is. And I hate that they're using it as a reason to feel superior to everyone else, because honestly? Europeans are garbage. We're all garbage.

  37. BS! Europeans are white and have been white. If you love blacks and brown people, move to Africa or ME! Eff off with your lies!

  38. Their argument against diversity is ridiculous because White Europeans fought among themselves for five hundred years after the fall of Rome, and their wars were more or less homogeneous. Diversity of skin color didnt cause any of that fighting.

  39. I'm a non white raised in London who was a raging leftie until just 3 years ago and Collett is right. You are on the wrong side of history.

  40. I just have to read the title alone to know that your video is bullshit. Europeans are white and they always were white. Though seeing as you’re a race denialist, it’s no surprise that you would come up with such an absurd claim. And what’s the best you got to argue against homogeneity, “muh infighting”? Yeah sure, so because around until 70 years ago that Europeans were fighting and killing each other, we should let in more groups who share great animosity towards Europeans which in turn would cause even more infighting in Europe. Though I guess that would take too much of your mental gymnastics to get around that. You are clearly on the wrong side of history Shaun. But don’t let this comment irk you since you already have your army of sycophants who are always willing to eat up whatever garbage you shove down their gullets.

  41. All you have done here is:
    1. Conflate recognizable peoples with landmasses.
    2. Show us black people who have been in Europe.

    Neither of these things prove anything.

    At a particular point in history there were European people on the New Zealand landmass. Does that mean the history of the Maori suddenly became indistinguishable from that of the Europeans who arrived? Did the Europeans suddenly get an equal claim to Maori history? Was the history of the Europeans now as shaped by that landmass as the history of the Maori? This is what you would have us believe.

    The "History of Europe" is the history of the people whose origins as recognizable groups lie in Europe. The reason white parents don't produce black children without interbreeding is because they have different genetic legacies shaped by different ancestral histories. The ancestral history of Europeans was shaped in Europe, which is why they are recognizably European and remain that way intergenerationally when left alone. Only they inherit that. They inherit it because it is their history.

    This is why black people who happen to be in Europe do not partake in the history of Europeans. It is the same reason that showing me photos of German tourists in the Amazonian rainforest does not make Germans have an equal claim to the ancestral history of Amazonian tribes, a history shaped by the Amazon.

  42. Hey thank you so much for not including any clips of Mark Collett speaking in this one. I love your vids, but there's only so much I can hear a voice saying disgusting things while dripping in smug self-righteousness before I need to decompress- take a shower, look at a butterfly, bang my head against the wall…

  43. You did not mention that theatre companies that present Shakespeare plays also cast based on the idea that the director is making a culture commentary when choosing the specific play, it’s setting and characters etc. This is why plays and films of Shakespeare’s plays vary from the original story to put them in fascist Nazi settings or take the story of Romeo and Juliet and put it in the west side of New York making the montagues and capulets the whites and the Puerto Ricans or take Hamlet and make them lions from Africa etc. I have seen most of Shakespeare’s plays live and never once seen the characters and settings correspond exactly with the original script. And of course there have been women in them, which never happened in Shakespeare’s time.

  44. So you said, "Well, he didn't actually say that…" That's called lying. Some of the young sheep here might not have caught that part leading them to more deception.

  45. You do understand what 'fascism' means don't you? Genuine question. If you think that only far right white nationalist types have 'fascist' belief tropes then that is worrying. Far left and extreme liberal ideology in the modern world has far more fascistic tendencies than anything demonstrated by the right. The sheer violent hypocrisy demonstrated by scumbag Antifa members being a prime example. "You disagree with my left wing liberal views?! You fucking nazi! I'll now use violence to show that I have the moral high ground!" Anyone who supports Antifa supports fascism, now there's some prime grade A irony for you.

  46. This video is a year old, so I doubt Shaun will see it – and I don't know how others will react to this – but I just thought I would point out that B*rber is considered to be a slur, as it translates to "barbarian." The proper term to use is Amazigh. And for the record, I heard about this from a person I follow on Facebook, who is herself Amazigh. There's also a page on the website called "Free People: The Imazighen of North Africa." Definitely worth checking out.

  47. Look ath the cancerous comments on the documentery Shaun mentioned. Very irritating and surreal to read stuff so delusional._.

  48. "Search internet" that's the root of the problem. You can also search "Filipinos" then you'd see tribal black people or tribal non black then you'd believe they're all tribal people. Dawg ignorance is bliss it's no argument Europe was majorly populated by white people thus European history is white history end of garbage rebutal. Phillipines has mostly civilized non tribal people in case you need to know.

  49. White surpremacy/surpremacist has to be the most miss-used label, right after fascist, I've seen Ho-teps vids[ black nationalist] where he talks to all these white people who everyone labels surpremacist…and they have all been clear slavery and what the south did was racist and horrible and made it worse up to the 60s , they agree with all the black seperatistnationalist that the races need to separate, In fact they constantly preach how it needs to happen peacefully and how messed up it is having white cops in black neighborhoods…these white people are definitely white nationalist but far from surpremacists, it's like calling half the black population black surpremacists for having the same feelings,, it bugs me when I find out myself people's beliefs from the source to find out Ive been lied to by the majority media I trusted. I agree all these groups use scare tactics, and what they want,at least for white areas of the globe, is futile, we've gone too far down this road. Whatever conflict that's to come, is unavoidable in the scope of centuries. But miss labeling people intentionally just irritates people like me who buy into majority opinion rather quickly, I've tried holding opinions on individuals I gather from mega news sources until I've at least read or heard directly from the source(preferably) what and how they think.

  50. Bunch of egalitarian nonsense. Picking out a literal FEW blacks out of MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS of whites in europe doesnt proce your point.

    Self hating fuckwad.

  51. Facist believe in censorship. Mark does not believe in that. Get your facts straight. Quit being a cuck and start reciting the 14.

  52. It’s interesting how you say “skin colour” rather than “race.” Do you not think race exists? Always sounds pretty dumb when people do this “they care about skin colour!” thing. No one gives a shit about skin colour; people care about race.

  53. "White" is a social construct.
    There are "white" arabs and indians.
    We are the european race and within our race we have multiple ethnicities that make a complimentary whole.
    Just like Japanese and Chinese are different ethnicities but both are asian. We exist as a race and if we have a grievance that we would prefer not to live around non-europeans we are immediately shut down. This is forced multiracialism. This guy knows damm well Britain was founded by multiple european peoples… Not africans or asians. And trying to pretend the race of people in Ethiopia or Egypt was the same during the romans as is today is intellectually dishonest.

  54. Just because the people of europe had different cultures and governments and invaded each other doesn't mean they were african or asian. Just because the Spanish were invaded by arabs doesn't mean they're not european. Although some Spanish have a higher admixture than other europeans doesn't mean it's not a historically "white" country. This doesn't prove Europe wasn't white. He just said because the various "white" European ethnicities didn't have a common culture than they don't exist as a race. Just because white europeans brought slaves from africa doesn't mean its always been multiracial. Europe has always been multicultural but NOT multiracial. This video and title are completely dishonest.

  55. Also, Pablo Fanque was a black Victorian.
    Nowadays, he’s known chiefly for being mentioned in the Beatles’ song, “Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite,” but that song was made up of claims on a poster advertising a real circus in Victorian times. And Pablo Fanque was a black man who owned the circus.

  56. “Regency England in Victorian Times” 🏆 whhhheeeewww. And this Mark Collett guy dares to bitch about historical accuracy?! That’s a tasty little nugget to demonstrate the reason Shaun schools this POS. It summarizes the whole problem of Mark Collett’s complaints.

  57. King Henry VIII hired Ethiopian divers to recover treasure from the wreck of the Mary Rose in 1545, because he was impressed by their ability to collect pearls.

    His favourite trumpet player was a black Moroccan Muslim man humorously nicknamed John Blanc.

    When his daughter Elizabeth I battled the Spanish Armada, she wrote a letter to Sultan Osman, considering an alliance and asking to loan some of his ships and sailors.

  58. @Shaun thank you for your videos. I haven't had this much fun learning since my husband taught me how to build my own computer!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *